KARRI NOOKARAJU Vs. PUTRA VENKATARAO
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The question that I am called upon to answer in this second appeal is whether the execution and attestation of a will dated 16/05/1947 are proved.
(2.) The facts are simple: The suit was brought by the first respondent for declaration of his title to and possession of the site described in the plaint schedule after ejecting the defendants therefrom and for recovery of Rs. 20.00 towards the value of bricks removed by the defendants therefrom and also for profits. The plaintiff alleged that the site belonged to Karri Somulu. Under a will dated 16/05/1947 he bequeathed the site to his wife and foster daughter and after their death to the children of the foster daughter. after the death of the testator, the wife and daughter were in possession and after their death, the latters daughter sold it to the plaintiff under a registered sale deed dated 14/07/1964. But, in July, 1964 defendants 1 and 2 trespassed into the site, put up a hut thereon and admitted into its possession. Hence the suit.
(3.) The first defendant denied the execution of the will by Somulu and denied its genuineness and validity also. He denied that Somulu fostered a daughter. In fact, the site did not belong to Somulu. In a partition with his brother, the site fell to the share of Thudupulu, grandfather of the first defendant. Ever since then Thudupulu and his successors were in possession and enjoyment of the same. Thus, the first defendant also required title by adverse possession. the alleged and nominal one. The alleged trespass was false.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.